How do you know USAC isn't just telling you what you want to hear, and that none of this was done for safety??

It was targeted at one group, in the TT only. http://wmrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2...munique_1a.pdf

That same group has specific rules changed just for them, just for the TT by the USA coaches. http://wmrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2...pmentRules.pdf

Add to that the junior gears for coaching, and the way they like to view/review power training (its complicated), I don't see that as coincidence, nor for safety.

But I don't KNOW.

I've had the coaching reasons given to me for junior gears, not anything I can verify for safety. USAC has no issue with up hill races for kids, or what they do the majority of the time on the bike not racing. The small % of the race time would only be a data point and not conclusive if there were injuries - I just can't find any in youth males due to big gears.

I have seen over use fatigue in local kids. Bigger gears help reduce fatugue, and are a way to recover a bit in training. It is the racing high cadence chasing adults down hills, and over/spinning too many miles in training rides I blame for that.

15-18 year old males jump off high things, leg press more than most free weight machines can hold. "Knocked kneed

Females have easy 5:1 the injuries, mainly ACL, as men, and don't need as big of a gear as speeds are lower. That would be the first place to look at gear restrictions.

It is done for coaching.

High cadence causes overuse more than lower cadence.

...the repetitive motion of pedalling can lead to a variety of overuse knee injuries. The majority of cycling injuries are indeed caused by overuse, which leads to cumulative tissue microtrauma and consequent symptoms. In overuse injuries the problem is often not acute tissue inflammation, but chronic degeneration.
http://www.kneeclinic.info/knee_spor...es_cycling.php

what does this mean?

Gears?

USA Cycling coaches want USA (junior) riders to race a certain way and be ready to race in Europe by racing that way.

The reason the Belgium kids have it as a rule (and 52X16 max for 15-16) is when they throw the typical 100+ kids out there for a race, they want them to learn race craft by riding in close proximity. The strong can't just power away. The high spinners might. I watched junior go off on each hill to get caught on each downhill. So kids have to learn to win. Cool, except in the USA outside of nats, and VOS we see junior fields of much smaller. But the USA coaches like the Euro way. So they want USA kids to learn it. And smaller gears keeps the strong from riding away. They are likely right, but that is coaching.

The next thing is they are into souplesse. The coach you spoke with will tell you about it. It is that cool-look from spinning, being natural. It is what we have been taught to think is the best way to ride for 3 decades. They want the kids to learn that. So smaller gears. That is also coaching.

Thing is, I don't know it is a better way to ride. I have some hard data owned by others it is not. It depends. Even if it is, making rules to tell athletes how to do it - is coaching. I reluctantly accept USAC's choice to do that, but I also want them to admit that is what they are doing and this safety thing they have going is an excuse nobody has data to support and actually hurting kids (not much as they can take a lot). Some might argue - USAC is also not doing it right. But I'm pretty hopeful about the new batch running things in Colorado Springs.

Stomp pedaling?

Pretty much. I lost the link to the paper but the most "stompy" pros were the fastest and most efficient.

The conclusion was something silly like "the greatest determinate of cycling performance is the amount of downward force produced at the crank 3 o'clock position."

I never would've guessed that the guys that can push hardest are also the fastest.

What happened to them? Who were they?

I think it remains a challenging geographical issue. With the exception of the greatest of the great American kids, prospects are moving across the globe for meager pay. I suspect if there were more opportunities at the same pay, but living/training/racing in the US, you'd see more kids getting into and sticking with the sport. The lack of visibility limits the number of kids taking up bike racing which in turns leads to a more shallow talent pool moreso than USAC making kids spin high cadence. Even if there is a brief glimmer of hope with these 2015 kids I can't imagine too many took on contracts because of the items above.

stomp pedaling is the result of chemtrails

I'm not an expert on human development or biology, but I think one could probably make the argument that stomp pedaling during development ages could lead to long-term damage of the knees.

We've seen it in a ton of other sports. Baseball, in particular, has pitch counts to limit how much throwing a young pitcher does. There is plenty of evidence to show that the wear and tear on an elbow and should can last a lifetime.

There's also a growing body of evidence on ACL tears in younger athletes, especially young women playing soccer, basketball, and cheerleading.

I wish this was a closed site (not Internet searchable). Lookup Nations Cup in Procycling stats or other. There are a series of UCI races. Nothing sinister, just that for the reason you mention, even when USA has a batch more talented than the EU, they don't generally move. I think your assessment is correct. Our most talented junior will most likely make a living at cycling, the rest - it is a hobby/rec, not because of ability. Teens leaving home at 18 to live in that world is a big ask.

I'd listen. It is not as violent as running. It is also not how to ride a long ride or RR. It is done when high and forward on the saddle ~30 min events.

High cadence is not limiting use, it increases it. The joint moves more for the same power. Many recent articles (inc the one I quoted above) blame repetitions. So you could argue a kid riding 300 miles a week is more likely to get hurt than those doing 200. I agree that is true. And we saw some over use (cause he loved to ride) tendon fatigue in junior. The solution was not ride so much.

It is mostly women, and I think it is hidden how high that multiple is. The men in that stat are generally from collision. There is a high correlation with hormonal cycles for the women as tendons soften/elongate. The ACL tear is generally from a twist you don't see in cycling, so I'm not claiming the same would happen, I don't think it is a problem at all.

Power applied with more force, shorter arc, partially invoking both muscle fibre types.
So 60lbs pedal force from 4 O'clock to 5 O'clock vs 20lbs pedal force from 2 O'clock to 5 O'clock, which would calculate to both be the same. You could say one is more spinning, the other square pedaling.

But when the short arc power is applied as a pulse/stomp, the power-on is higher (PMs tell us this). I expect because it is invoking a different type of muscle (fast twitch) for that fraction of a second and then the other type for the remaining stroke. Total power is higher.

I took the picture down, but contact CyberCycleCoach Dave to learn it. He has plenty of power data to support his argument.

This sounds similar to the argument I've been making for why I seem to fatigue less and do much better at flat/downhill pedaling in high speed situations than at climbing. I'm more on the fast twitchy side naturally (though with training I'm becoming more balanced), and that feeling of 'topping off' the speed through a short part of the pedal stroke seems so much easier to maintain than climbing slowly.

Location has limitations too. Why would a team go to somewhere like Minot ND to sign an average level prospect when there are 20 guys with the same potential in Western Europe?

European baseball players have the same problem. There's been at least a few pitchers that could throw good enough, but when you are in a remote location people don't sign 'good enough'. Going back to cycling, that means the cyclists like Greg Lemond and Lance Armstrong will get signed, but stars that develop into stars later like Froome will not.

So the kids have to move to the sports mecca to develop but most just don't have the resources. Its much easier for a kid in Belgium or France to stick with it as he doesn't have to leave home, learn a new language, and has a easier time finding secondary income (if he even needs it).

Anyone ever actually get a TUE?

Weed is now legal in CA and I'm pretty sure I'd really benefit from 2-5mg each night to aid primarily in (stress/anxiety-reduced) sleep, but it's against the rules in-competition. Competition here goes from like January - September, and thc stays in your system long enough that it would either be don't-use, be at risk of a positive, or try to get a TUE.

Can it be any doctor who signs off, or what?

Theoretically there has to be documentation that every other realistic option has been tried prior to the thing that requires a TUE. In practice I honestly do not know how strict they are.

You could try Rhodiola? It's pretty well known for helping with stress and anxiety, and as a bonus it's a mild adaptogen.

My point about the pitch counts wasn't to point out the number of times they throw the ball, but rather they number of times they throw the ball really hard. Bigger gears are, in many, but not all, cases, harder to turn than smaller gears. I can see the argument that a developing body is more likely to sustain injury from repeatedly slamming a big gear.

Throwing a ball "soft" is less power. This is not the case with juniors. We are not pulling back power, just switching gears. For the most part I just see we are making arguments. I have not been able to find data. Personally I have seen some use/over use fatigue, but that is more data than I can find on racing male junior knees.

Any kid able to hang with 15+ boys is training much more than racing. So, even if there were data supporting big gears are bad, rules do not address where most time is spent, not do they address hill where kids are definitely pushing hard.

Eh I mean if you're doing the same power but higher RPMs, you're producing less torque which in all likelihood puts less stress on developing joints. That said they still climb the same hills as the rest of us, so it really mostly applies to kermessey type stuff and crits.

huh. I will now.

We do a lot of drug research at my job, and this morning I was talking with a coworker, when I commented, "Oh, I'm on opioids this morning."

I've also been overheard saying on the phone, "I'd prefer not to sit in a video and talk about my drug addictions."

In any other place, that would probably have been grounds for some serious inquiry or concern, but here, no one bats an eye.

My friends made of of me for ending a conversation once, "speaking of gonorrhea, I have to be getting back to work."

On the one topic: Junior baseball stuff limits the pitch types allowed and the innings/throws allowed per player over the game counts to limit injuries.

On another topic.....I've been following the Novo guys and noticed now in two tours in a row they appear to be going after the IM sprint points. They got it in the first race. Not sure it will work this time. It tells me they don't have a credible leadout train or sprinter to challenge a stage win or overall in these flat races.

Same thing pretty much going on 10x in a row now, send Planet into the break to try for IM sprint points then have the break get caught and have someone finish around 15th each time.

It'll interesting to see what they try at Milan-San Remo.